Authentic | Quadropolis

Nieb | 2009-12-07 21:53

Authentic

[

164

points ]

(27 votes)

This content is now included in the official release of the game, so you do not need to download it if you already have the latest release. The content stored here may not reflect the copy the game uses.

Blurb New CTF map by Jonlimle & Nieb.

Screenshot Authentic

Get original file (76KB)

Detailed description

New CTF map by Jonlimle & Nieb.

Update 1: Included skybox, added armour pickups.
Update 2: Expanded the X & Dot theme.
Update 3: Clipping.

Map file authentic5.zip (1.44 MB)

Rating

164

points

(27 votes)

Comments

K1P57A | 2009-12-07 22:03

Could it be that you've linked to a missing directory for the skybox (or used a non released skybox)? I get an error following by the ultra-nice notextureskybox ;)

jonlimle | 2009-12-07 22:21

the skybox is currently only in svn, im sure nieb will put it into the package today.
Jon limle

Kretren | 2009-12-07 22:45

Pretty good.

The layout is more or less perfect, I think.. You've designed it almost formulaicly; the long path in the middle is logically cut off with a small wall, and there's a perfect little sniper spot at the side with the weird structure with curvy bars in it.

Layout aside, I do have a couple problems with this map. First, you've made really short rocky sides, which is fine, but then they're clipped off. Since they should be so easy to jump onto right now, this is a problem.. It really disrupts the illusion in the game. Maybe consider raising those rock pillars too.

The crate texture is really bad. I've never been a fan of it: the resolution is far too low on it, and its colors and details look really fake on it. I'd opt for a different one. Plus it blends almost, with the pink-ish ground underneath it.

Texture blending is immaculate. There is a gradual transition from the grass to the pathways, etc. It was well done.

Small detail: Since you've defined each side with either an x or an o, why not continue this theme? For example, make the jumppad on the x side an x rather than the o you use elsewhere. You can go a step further with the architecture too, but that is your choice.. Right now, I don't see much to define each side; there are no lights, colors, or abstract architecture on each side. But you did make the outside architecture different, oddly.

The wood pillars underground need to be noclipped. They're easy to bump into, especially the metal decals you put on them.

At this point I'm picking on random details since this is a pretty good map. The other thing is you screwed up on the packaging and screenshot.

Anyways, 4/5. This is pretty good, and I see it being similar in gameplay to l_ctf or capture_night: small but intense.

jonlimle | 2009-12-08 00:57

here are the files correctly packaged, with the skybox also
http://www.mediafire.com/?djm1znyxheq
Jon limle

K1P57A | 2009-12-08 06:23

Thanks for the quick update :)

Blarget2 | 2009-12-08 10:53

haha, you dd use my wall as cover XD. i give 5/5 just for that!

Baguel | 2009-12-08 12:35

I like the map and his geometry but i found the gameplay a little basic.

4/5

Erzeälh | 2009-12-08 12:45

First of all. I question myself about the objectif of quadropolis. How nieb or other person who decide the map in the next realise, could decide to include thier map before having any vote or external opinion about it.

After, again i'm surprise that jonlimne vote 5/5 on his own map. It's not really correct. I delete 1 point on my vote for this.

For talking about the map now:

Eastethic remind me a bit Elders scrolls IV : oblivion atmosphere. I love the central construction. but some other construction seem a bit poor and not harmonic together. The cross and circle sigle on each base are not a good choose.

The texture are well choose in general but on some construction, it's difficulte to see the difference of volume because of not enough difference between some of them.

The gameplay is really basic and linear for my opinion. The jumpad in the base are not really well think.

2/5

eihrul | 2009-12-08 13:04

I decided to include it, not Nieb?

Erzeälh | 2009-12-08 13:32

I had said : "nieb or other person", this show that i'm not sure that it's Nieb who select map. But thanks for your honesty Eihrul.

By the way, it respond not to me what is the objectif of voting at quadropolis.

Quin | 2009-12-08 14:32

Quadropolis and Sauerbraten are separate entities, the purpose of voting here is to increase the likelihood it will be noticed by other people (higher rating means higher chance of being 'starred'). None of this is a democracy, in each different area we decide how things go and you don't really have a say in the matter; unless, of course, you produce something *yourself* which makes you valuable enough to listen to, then you *might* be taken under advisement. In this case it is Aard and Eihrul's project, and the choice is theirs.

Poum | 2009-12-08 13:07

I don't understand why this map is in the new release... why? because
1]the map is not voted by the player before
2]i don't think that the map is really great... but i will explain that after

My question is : who decide wich map will be in the release? is it only one person? don't you think that it's subjectif?

aboute the map :
The map isn't as great as the vote ... the gameplay is very simple, a bit boring, and the mapping is very anyway the general ambience is great... try to improove the mapping and the gameplay...

7/10...

eihrul | 2009-12-08 15:23

At this point it is mostly just me deciding which maps make it into release. It is fairly obvious to me on first sight which maps are release-worthy and which are not, but it is not necessarily so to the larger body of quadropolis mappers who vote on a map. If a map is around a 4 or higher rating, this usually means the map is pretty release-worthy artistically, not because you got the artificial number 4, but because of the quality that is obvious in the map required to make people want to rate it that. However, there can still be technical or gameplay problems with a map, despite a high rating, that cause me to decide not to incorporate at all. The rating process, really, is more for the benefit of peer review and improvement of mappers - I know good maps when I see them, so that if you show me a map off of quadropolis, I might include it if I think it is a good map. However, most maps benefit from the review of other mappers and suggestions of other maps, and posting them on quadropolis and getting review here increases the odds of a map getting included.

Windecker | 2009-12-08 13:56

Looks pretty, but:

The paths on the ground are to faint. Texture blending is a little blotchy.

The large rock extrusions are Square! Work on that, it doesn't suit the rest of the map.

The Round theme... is getting way over used...

The boxes on the bottom are just there and don't fit in at all. Perhaps use models and have them angled to fit the shape of terrain, and use a better texture..

The small structure by the spawn points is climbable but the rock is clipped, I advise that this not be climbable at all, as people then get mad when they run into the invisible wall of clip after climbing the thing.

The doorways on the bases at each end have a small lip that you can get hung up on, clip it or bevel it.

Finally, the X and O. The X looks very crude in relation to everything else, I wont argue with the O though.

There is also a .svn directory in the skybox folder that oughta be removed.

Blindabuser | 2009-12-08 14:06

I'm a big fan of Nieb's maps since the days I've discovered Sauerbraten, back in 2005. The overall layout and gameplay on this one are nice and enjoyable, I also like the curvy theme: a sort of signature for the latest Nieb's levels, which adds originality and a "Mario World" feel, although care must be taken to prevent overexploitation.

However, looking at masterpieces such as Hallo and nevil_c, as an example of graphical virtuosity combined with good gameplay, I couldn't help but noticing how, lately, Nieb's map are characterized by a couple of features with which I disagree, as they debase the visual potential of the game, and make me wonder why, in favor of compatibility with a negligible percentage of extremely old computers (mine is from 2005 and runs "Thor" at 75-85fps) we should give up visual appearance so much:

Old, overused textures (the beautiful, normal-mapped ones seem deprecated by everyone, lately..)
Rather basic layouts, with lack of catchy details (respectable choice, if occasional)

I don't expect this game to look like the (as slick as ephemeral) commercial titles, but degrade as a choice is highly deplorable, IMHO. So, my vote is 4/5 as I rather like the map and respect Nieb and Jonlimle's work, but I'd expect more.

Edit: the screenshot is missing.

eihrul | 2009-12-08 15:39

Nieb's maps don't look like they do because of performance reasons. That's just what he wanted the map to look like, believe it or not, as opposed to some conscious choice to compromise the map. It just merely happens that all Nieb's maps tend to run extremely well, too, which makes them far more likely for me to include. They are not always awe-inspiring, but generally coherent, with a sense of style, and technically solid.

On the particular issue of performance, just because YOU have a computer that is relatively powerful, there are also a large swath of players who don't. I am an advocate for all players of Sauer, which includes them too. There are still new computers that can't even run thor at 7 FPS, let alone 70. I have to balance Sauerbraten against what is the norm for players of a *freeware* game, not what is a AAA game, which due to selection bias, gets players almost exclusively using top of the line hardware. There are people who simply can't afford even a computer made in the last 5 years or in countries where such luxuries basically don't exist. This means I sort of roll my eyes looking at some maps, which may be pretty and fun and whatever, but would run like a slide-show to some players. I prefer a balance of appearance and scalability that is different from today's commercial games. As AAA games leave these people behind, we pick them up as new additions to the Sauer community. Take-home: the more your map stresses performance, the more stunningly awesome it has to be for me to consider it, regardless of how it compares to other maps.

Blindabuser | 2009-12-08 17:41

Firstly, thank you very much for the prompt, exhaustive reply and for explaining Nieb's original view on his maps, which I respect.

Concerning your remarks: you've got some strong, understandable points here, to which I have little to add besides agreeing. My only worries are based on the fact that, by obstinately keeping the game playable even for a Commodore VIC-20 (I wish! :D) there's the opposite risk to have the game turning "obsolete", by which I don't mean according to commercial standards but just chronologically, as if you'd produce horse-cars in 2009, for people who couldn't afford motor cars: you'd cover a very small niche of users, for whom Cube 1 should be ideal.

Also, let's not forget about the average player, who doesn't care about (or couldn't afford) dedicated hardware, but still finds visual appearance as valuable as performances. Even small (30Mb) flash™ games, that actually run on old computers, come with rather pleasant graphics without being AAA.

You're one of the managers of this project, and the last word is yours. More than a selfish claim, mine was just a humble suggestion: I'll then shut up and disappear back in my dark corner.

eihrul | 2009-12-08 18:19

The problem is we are in the worst of all scenarios where the haves are getting more powerful hardware, but the have-nots seem to be standing still. Sauer can barely compete, if at all, with many of the commercial games that were released years before it was in visuals. So what do you do, try to push a free engine/game towards the high end crowd who will ignore it unless it looks better than Crysis and gives them eyegasms, or hedge your bets towards a more stable player base?

Blindabuser | 2009-12-08 22:59

I'd say a mix of both, but I've got your point and it's a noble choice. Then, when I'll finally have some time to make a new map, I'll keep these matters in mind.

Poum | 2009-12-08 15:47

do you care about the starred content or not? do a map have more chance to be in the release if the map is starred? or not? (and can you say if one day you will take a map of mine(that's on quadropolis) xD)

eihrul | 2009-12-08 15:48

As stated, the rating other mappers give is not important. What is important is the feedback of other mappers that may allow you to produce a better map than you would be capable of producing on your own. And with respect to the map you have in mind, while is is nice-ish, it is hellish on performance and really needs to be moderated in that aspect.

Nieb | 2009-12-09 01:37

Not using Bumpmapped textures in my maps is very much a conscious choice. I think Parallax-mapping is quite hideous, particularly with low resolution textures. I am not much a fan of Normalmapping either.

Windecker | 2009-12-09 02:18

Aye, It is a mix between taste, application, and the texture of course. Normal mapping/parallax can be very nice in some areas, but horrid in others ( like where there is an edge or overlap ) They can also grant beautiful lighting effects...

The trick is always balance...

On that topic, I'd like to try blending two of the same texture, one version without shaders and see if hideous edges can be fixed.

Meister | 2009-12-09 15:15

Very clean and pretty map, with a fairly nice atmosphere, in terms of "aestethic" I really like it. I didn't try the gameplay, and I don't like too much the buildings, but it's just a matter of taste I guess.

Quin wrote: "None of this is a democracy", in each different area we decide how things go and you don't really have a say in the matter"
Yes, noticed.

eirhul wrote: "As stated, the rating other mappers give is not important. What is important is the feedback of other mappers that may allow you to produce a better map than you would be capable of producing on your own"
Totally agree. And more: since "None of this is a democracy" then just get rid of the voting system, it's pretty useless and not objective (the more "friends" the mapper has, the better the rate). Why not just keep only the "comments" section? To give people the possibility to advice others will work nicely as well.
Wishes

RaZgRiZ | 2009-12-09 15:37

cause voting a way to prompt simple users to download content worthy their time =P
think of the public will you? >.>

Meister | 2009-12-09 15:54

@ragriz:
Man, is my english that bad?
I meant this:
1) the vote is useless if not objective;
2) it's not a democracy, right? let the admins give priority to maps they like, just let THEM decide what is download-worthy.
If you can't live without the rating system I would suggest an alternative solution, like on some big review sites, having two ratings: the "users" rating and the "editor" rating, that's a bit more fair than the actual system.

Quin | 2009-12-09 16:23

The way admins rate projects is by first rating the node, then if the node does well in the wild it usually gets promoted as "Starred". Yes, this isn't always the case, I know, but it is often a good indicator to us. Am I going to regret the "not a democracy" comment? I was just being honest :P

LinuxJunkie | 2009-12-10 16:55

One good way to let people play what they want instead of what the Sauer project managers decide they play, is to put a map downloader within Sauer. Let people surf Quad content from within Sauer. You know, have Sauer grab the zip file from Quadropolis, extract it, and place it in their personal Sauer directories.

Then you could give the same power to the players, or server master, that they have with the included maps. If the server master forces everyone to play a Quad map, the server would grab the files from Quad, and then send all necessary files to everyone on the server, just like a forced getmap.

t-chen | 2009-12-09 16:23

yey, i agree with meister, his suggestion sounds nice!

RaZgRiZ | 2009-12-09 18:39

yea its a better idea than removing the whole star rating system.
There could be something like the xspore site uses to rate their content, like:
Playability
Originality
Texturing
Detailing
Lightweight
Aesthetics

Quin | 2009-12-09 22:11

When you consider that most people are too lazy to rate something even once, what makes you think adding more rating subjects is gonna help that?

Windecker | 2009-12-10 13:27

Some people are too lazy, yes, but lots of people still vote on something they deem as good. I see an average of 6 to 14 votes on most maps, and that should be plenty.

I personally would go for two votes:

-Mapping/Editing ( appearance in general )
-Game-play

The two things that sum it up, and people often love the gameplay and hate the looks or the other way around. It would help people know better what area to focus on a bit more.
Also: some people download maps just for something pretty and others for killing, it will help those people. ^.^ ( me )

MisanthropX | 2009-12-10 14:10

in my opinion the map is about 3~4

The lighting is again way too boring (only white again?)
with a bit blue in the underground and a bit red at the one and only torch
and the styles are mixed again.. a few spikey random sculptures.. a few curvy.. etc.
the underground doesnt seem very interesting too. just pillars. and a few boxes

and the layout is in my opinion way too simple

wont vote yet

LinuxJunkie | 2009-12-10 15:59

Nice game paly, and it looks good too.

Dr Eij | 2009-12-11 14:42

Gameplay notations are based on CTF modes.

Gameplay (competition) : 1.5/5 (--)Very limited number of tactics, (-)too open, (-)useless TPs, (-)easy map
Gameplay (public servers) : 2/5 (-)not enough width
Gameplay (global) : 10.5/35 + 6/15 = 16.5/50

Mapping (technical) : 2.5/5 (-)none details, (-)none lights/shadows, (+)good skybox, (+)not a bad background, (?)new concept
Mapping (general aspect) : 2/5 (-)maybe a new concept but i don't like, (-)not enough contrast, (-)bad colors as the pink on the bridge, the map is too white
Mapping (global) : 7.5/15 10/25 = 17.5/40

Configs : 4.5/5 (-)little decrease of FPS at the middle, (+)very good optimization
Configs (global) : 9/10

Global (total) : 43/100

I can't believe that this map will be in the next release. I don't know if i am the only one but i don't like atmosphere of this map.

PS : a little bug must be corrected in both bases (the wall is too thin).

Suicizer | 2009-12-11 18:31

i agree meister to, but i would prefer if admins wouldnt give people so quick and with not that much sense a "skull" picture. and like usual, theres no answer actualy why they gave u that picture :S.

about the map,sorry to say but 4 my opinion the map looks like if the editors had the idea to add vampi's "scratch" (like he called it :P) into a gameplay map, wich isnt bad on principe.
the lightning, texturing and geometry r good. same for flow and gameplay, but i think some rocks shouldnt be clipped. it always creates a nice effect if some1 trickjumps over or on then on a suprising way for the opponent.
not bad but ive seen better 2day :P!

60 points.